Meta:Requests for deletion

(Redirected from Requests for deletion)
Requests and proposals Requests for deletion Archives (current)→
This page hosts local (i.e., Meta-Wiki) requests for page deletion. For requests for speedy deletion from global sysops or stewards, see Steward requests/Miscellaneous. Any language may be used on this page. Before commenting on this page, please read the deletion policy, in particular the criteria for speedy deletion, and the inclusion policy. Please place the template {{RFD}} on the page you are proposing for deletion, and then add an entry in an appropriate section below. As a courtesy, you may wish to inform the principal authors of the page about the request. After at least one week, an administrator will close and carry out the consensus or majority decision.

Articles that qualify for speedy deletion should be tagged with {{delete}} or {{delete|reason}}, and should not be listed here. (See also speedy deletion candidates.) Files with no sources should be tagged with {{no source}} and need not be listed here, either. To request undeletion, see #Requests for undeletion. See Meta:Inclusion policy for a general list of what does not belong on the Meta-Wiki.

Previous requests are archived. Deletion requests ({{Deletion requests}}) can be added to talk page to remember previous RfDs.
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 180 days.


Submit your page deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Wikimedians of Slovakia's Annual Report 2018Edit

Basically the same report, in 2 languages:

The text below is from the English version. The Slovak version have the same issue, with even stronger wording.

The report contains false and libelled information about me (Michal Matúšov). The organisation haven't reacted on Meta for 7 months; private consultation (regarding the file on WMSK's website) is ongoing. The false, libelled information is in the section "Board changes" and texts "Michal Matúšov resigned his position as well as his membership in the organization on 20 December 2018. As a result, Radoslava Semanová, the deputy chair, became the only board member able to act in the name of the organization. However, she was staying abroad at the time. Accordingly, the board asked Michal Matúšov to register the organization for 2%. The then chair asked for a 100 euro reward for such action. The board, knowing the potential outcome of the 2% registration accepted it." More information on the topic is on the Talk:Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/en.

See also c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:WMSK – Výročná správa 2018.pdf.

--KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 19:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I will only add that the matter has been brought to the attention of AffCom. WMSK and I personally have been supportive of this inquiry and we have offered all the necessary information and explanation to AffCom. I hope you, KuboF, have done the same. Be well!--Jetam2 (talk) 14:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Just a correction: WMSK, Jetam2 personally and ex-member of Audit Committee Lukas Mikulec was in fact very unsupportive of this inquiry. During 7 months they made absolutely no reaction on Talk:Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/en nor on Talk:Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/sk, during more than 1 month no reaction on the original RfD and even was covering-up the falseness of the information in the report. Good to know that this is the "support" that WMSK is providing for the Wikimedia movement...
But back to the topic: The report spreads false and libelled information about living person for 5 months. I again ask admins for deletion. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 19:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I (and we) do not believe it is best practice to keep reacting and rereacting and rerereacting. Issues in the reports and others have been explained many a time on sk.wikipedia where they were first raised. See, especially here. There comes a point where more explanation will not advance anything. That is why we welcome AffCom's interest into the matter. Let AffCom judge our participation in the inquiry.--Jetam2 (talk) 20:26, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Jetam2, please keep this discussion on topic - its topic is the concrete report (Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/en, Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/sk), not any report (I am also not going to write here about bylaw violation of WMSK's functionaries here, simple because it would be off-topic...). I have raised objections about this specific issue on Talk:Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/en and Talk:Wikimedians of Slovakia/Reports/2018/sk but functionaries of WMSK was only covering up the issue without solving it. As the report is spreading false and libelled information about living person for more than half a year, I ask admins to proceed the request for deletion. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 10:48, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I wish you took your own advice and not spread libelous information about a cover up etc. In any case, I now understood that the chronology was indeed reversed. I corrected it.--Jetam2 (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Please refer to the report discussion page.--Jetam2 (talk) 13:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

KuboF Hromoslav, would it help to just replace your real name with your username for now? (While as I understand other people are still figuring out what is going on). It definitely does not look constructive to delete the whole report. --Base (talk) 23:26, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

This may sound usable at a glance, but it introduces another problem. The text presented is an official document. Changing its content without clear decision of the Generally Assembly would break its integrity. As a, not the best, compromise I have emptied the page and put up into the listing direct link to the original version. Hopefully admins can delete it quickly and WMSVK correct it officially so the document will contain only truthful information. --KuboF Hromoslav (talk) 14:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Blanking is hardly a compromise. For more information, I added a longer explanation of the contexts. Thanks!--Jetam2 (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Can I exactly know what is the basis of deletion? I really can't follow this discussion even after reading several times. Thanks much, willing to do what is needed. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 10:35, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: Took me a bit to unravel this as well. As I understand it KuboF Hromoslav has alleged that the report contains false and defamatory information, which is specified in the nomination statement. This has been disputed by Jetam2. In any event I've added my thoughts below, but what is really needed is an investigation by AffCom or whoever is responsible for sorting out these disputes. 𝒬𝔔 21:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

  Comment, the essential question here is whether the section is defamatory as alleged. If so then deletion is appropriate as we should not host libel, or at the very least the offending section would need to be removed and previous versions revision deleted. If not however, an official report certainly fails within meta's inclusion policy. 𝒬𝔔 21:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on this. AffCom is looking into it and WMSK is cooperating as requested and required. Be well!--Jetam2 (talk) 02:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Shall we defer to Affcom decision? I think there are members on Affcom who have rights to delete pages here, shall we let them do the necessary? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
@Camouflaged Mirage: yes, defer to AffCom is my current position on this in a nutshell. I guess we'll have to wait and see if any other independent observers feel differently. 𝒬𝔔 17:07, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Translation requests/Guidelines for future chapters/sourceEdit

This is an outdated translation request, when there wasn’t Translate extension. I don’t know what to do with actual translations, but I think they can be deleted too; do you agree? --Pols12 (talk) 22:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


Submit your template deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Template:WRC tabsEdit

Unused template. Translations were removed on July, 9th 2017. I don’t know about obsolete template policies. --Pols12 (talk) 13:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

It's used in the userpage sandboxes. Can it just be userfied? María is no longer staff, but if I understand correctly it's from an alternate navigation system idea that she was designing, and it might potentially be useful to someone in the future. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


Submit your category deletion request at the bottom of this section.


Submit your image deletion request at the bottom of this section.


Submit your redirect deletion request at the bottom of this section.

Requests for undeletionEdit

Submit your undeletion request at the bottom of this section.


To be used by e.g. Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Mongolian written in Mongolian script, because as far as I know the Traditional Mongolian scripts are writting vertically. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Is there any current use case? - I'd recommend to import the template in the current version from enwiki however, if need be. --MF-W 18:54, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: From Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Xibe, @MiiCii: says: ...(ᠸᡳᡴᡳᡦᡝᡩᡳᠠ, I'm not sure how to display the Xibe script vertically on Meta-wiki, please rotate the Xibe text above 90° clockwise)... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
@MF-Warburg: People‘s Daily in Traditional Mongolian script. However, I don’t know how the scripts were displayed vertically on that site.
Xibe script must be displayed vertically like Traditional Mongolian, so it is necessary to display them vertically. In my opinion, your idea is reasonable. —-MiiCii (talk) 04:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: So, do you still oppose this restore request or not, by reading discussions above? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey what? What sort of words are you trying to put into my mouth? I have never expressed any opinion on the template, and I retain no opinion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:Because you deleted it, the log will never wrong. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:53, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
The log shows that I mass deleted a string of pointless/unneeded creations of copied templates from other sites by a user now blocked; Special:DeletedContributions/IPad365 and Special:Contributions/IPad365. There is nothing more and nothing less So there is no "still" and there is no "oppose". I have no opinion on the template.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)